[Bored chemist]

I challenge you to take a picture of a flying commercial aircraft releasing a thick white plume...

Meanwhile, I believe readers will assume that clandestine geoengineering activity is real.

Pointing out the truth (and backing it up with pictures) is not disinformation.
Well, since I already posted one you presumably realise that readers (and there must be damned few still here) will recognise that- if it ever existed- there is no longer evidence for clandestine geoengineering.
You can stop trolling now.

[smart]

Pointing out the truth (and backing it up with pictures) is not disinformation.

Unlike you, I have photographic evidences of chemtrails, and not posting disinformation. You on the other hand have no evidences that chemtrails do not exist and yet you claim I'm trolling. So, either you are clearly putting forward propaganda or I'm confusing a cirrus cloud with a chemtrail. I think you must wake up and stop the cognitive infiltration.

 

[Bored chemist]

Unlike you, I have photographic evidences of chemtrails,
 

Well why don't you post it?
So far you have not put forward any evidence of anything.
(and saying I don't have evidence of the non-existence of something is just silly. You are the one who says they exist; so you are the one who has to provide the evidence)

[smart]

Well why don't you post it?
So far you have not put forward any evidence of anything.
(and saying I don't have evidence of the non-existence of something is just silly. You are the one who says they exist; so you are the one who has to provide the evidence)

I already posted it here: http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=49418.msg494974#msg494974

As far as I know, contrails don't form a high density plume from the combustion of jet fuel. So I challenge you once again to find a picture of a commercial aircraft which releases a visible and persisting plume that alters cloud composition. 

Also, what is the point in contesting the existence of chemtrails ? You or a cointelpro agent are virtually the same entity in denying the reality of clandestine geoengineering activity.

[Bored chemist]

What you posted was a picture of a plane and its contrail.
That's not evidence of chemtrails is it?
So, as I said, you have yet to post any evidence of chemtrails.
Repeating your claim that you have done so doesn't help.

"As far as I know, contrails don't form a high density plume from the combustion of jet fuel. "
Then you don't know enough.
Let me know when something changes.

[smart]

What you posted was a picture of a plane and its contrail.

A condensation trail cannot be produced from the jet engines of an aircraft. This is a typical error or propaganda
term to confuse people on the synthetic nature of theses chemical trails.

The term "chemtrail" is correct to designate the aerosolized substance used for clandestine geoengineering purpose.

[Bored chemist]

What you posted was a picture of a plane and its contrail.

A condensation trail cannot be produced from the jet engines of an aircraft. This is a typical error or propaganda
term to confuse people on the synthetic nature of theses chemical trails.

The term "chemtrail" is correct to designate the aerosolized substance used for clandestine geoengineering purpose.

"A condensation trail cannot be produced from the jet engines of an aircraft. "
Why not?
Burning jet fuel produces water. it's cold up there and so the water condenses.
(It's not the only mechanism but it's a perfectly reasonable one).
What stops the water  formed by combustion  condensing out when it meets cold air in much the same way your breath "steams" on a cold day?

The term "imaginary" is correct to designate the aerosolized substance used for clandestine geoengineering purpose.
Unless you can actually show some evidence.

[smart]

You don't know what a contrail is. A contrail is produced from the wingtips of an aircraft. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingtip_vortices

Furthermore calling a "contrail" a persistent high density plume is absurd. No "contrail" or wingtip vortices can persist in the atmosphere.

A "chemtrail" is the correct term to designate what the propaganda (official narrative) defines as a "contrail".

And I guess it's normal for non-scientific people to ignore the proper terminology since disinformation is omnipresent about the science of chemtrails. I'm just disappointed by your overall knowledge of basic science.

[Bored chemist]

You don't know what a contrail is. A contrail is produced from the wingtips of an aircraft. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingtip_vortices

Furthermore calling a "contrail" a persistent high density plume is absurd. No "contrail" or wingtip vortices can persist in the atmosphere.

A "chemtrail" is the correct term to designate what the propaganda (official narrative) defines as a "contrail".

And I guess it's normal for non-scientific people to ignore the proper terminology since disinformation is omnipresent about the science of chemtrails. I'm just disappointed by your overall knowledge of basic science.

If you are going to cite wiki, use the right page. It will take you here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail#/media/File:Sq_contrails_ybbn.jpg
where it's clear that the contrails are not at the wingtips.

You have yet to say anything that is backed up by evidence. As such, you have introduced nothing scientific.

How do you feel able to comment on my knowledge of science in these circumstances?
That's a particularly interesting question given how poorly you have grasped science- as witnessed by your postings about zeoltites.

[smart]

If you are going to cite wiki, use the right page. It will take you here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail#/media/File:Sq_contrails_ybbn.jpg
where it's clear that the contrails are not at the wingtips.

Hahahaha. On this "Contrail" page the picture is labelled a "aviaticus cloud"...

Just pathetic disinformation.

Are you finished trolling now?

[Bored chemist]

Please learn to read.
What I said was please use the right page.
That's this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail
And it takes you to that image.

So it isn't disinformation at all. The problem is your inability to read.
Not patheit, not trolling.
Just you not doing your job.
And, as ever, you have no evidence.

Interstingly, if you google aviaticus cloud it takes you here
http://clouds.wikia.com/wiki/Cirrus_aviaticus?file=Contrail.jpg
where you can see the contrail from each of the 4 engines

[smart]

Only a fool could believe this "cirrus aviaticus" propaganda without any scientific litterature about this "novel" cirrus cloud. The reality is that solar radiation management do alter atmospheric cloud composition. 

[Bored chemist]

Only a fool would ignore the evidence that they cited themselves.
Do you remember posting a picture of a plane?

You still have no evidence.

[smart]

You're lying. I have said multiple times and posted photographic evidences of clandestine geoengineering activity in this thread and others as well. Why do you want to make this a confrontation ? Research on clandestine geoengineering activity is a scientific duty.

Please stop the lies. I know what a evidence is. I'm only attempting rational discussion about the synthetic nature of chemtrails... Not contrails. I'm not interested in your pseudo-scientific arguments about contrails and the water vapor.

There's no way we can win this battle unless we unite to dig in evidences and find a methodology to stop this non sense.

Bored chemist, I think you're extremely intelligent but unfortunately you need to understand why this battle do concern your attitude regarding chemtrails. Let me know if something changes.

   

[Bored chemist]

This
"Bored chemist, I think you're extremely intelligent but unfortunately you need to understand why this battle do concern your attitude regarding chemtrails." doesn't make sense.

Anyway
You have posted pictures and then claimed that they are chemtrails.
But you have never posted any evidence that they are made from anything but water have you?
So you have not shown that they are anything other than contrails.
So you have not posted evidence of chemtrails.

It's not me being confrontational. I'm just asking you to back up your claim withe  evidence.
You are refusing or failing to do so, then calling me a liar.

You have not posted any evidence of chemtrails
Come back when something changes.

[smart]

This
"Bored chemist, I think you're extremely intelligent but unfortunately you need to understand why this battle do concern your attitude regarding chemtrails." doesn't make sense.

Let me help you understand why your attitude and logic regarding clandestine geoengineering activity is quackery. Your pseudoscientific voodoo doesn't help. Water vapor doesn't persist in the atmosphere to create cloud condensation nuclei or a high density plume. 

Anyway
You have posted pictures and then claimed that they are chemtrails.
But you have never posted any evidence that they are made from anything but water have you?
So you have not shown that they are anything other than contrails.
So you have not posted evidence of chemtrails.

It's not me being confrontational. I'm just asking you to back up your claim withe  evidence.
You are refusing or failing to do so, then calling me a liar.

You have not posted any evidence of chemtrails.

Stop lying. You're being confrontational all the time ignoring everything from scientific litterature to photographic evidences. I know what a evidence is. You don't have any regarding that theses "contrails"
are composed of strictly water vapor. Please don't tell me I don't know what water vapor is.

[Bored chemist]

What evidence have you offered that the trails behind aircraft are anything but water (Perhaps a little impure)?

Without that you have offered no evidence of chemtrails (as distinct from contrails)
That's why I say you have not offered any evidence of chemtrails.

Let me know when something changes.

[smart]

Since when aerosolized jet fuel can alter clouds composition? If this was the case, all jets would produces a high density plume suitable for albedo modification. Obviously this is not the case and commercial jets do not emit such cloud condensation nuclei particles. Also, water is not reflective. A contrail do not reflect sunlight.

[Bored chemist]

"Also, water is not reflective."
No
Look at clouds.

Also, you seem to have failed to understand that the combustion of jet fuel produces water- rather more than the weight of the fuel.
So you already have a massive supersaturation so you don't need to worry about nucleation.

The different  trails produced by different craft are due to different "weather" up there

So, you still have no evidence that the so called "chem trails" are anything but water.
Let me know when something changes.

[smart]

Don't forget the basics. It's called "climate engineering" for a reason. Chemtrails are persistent and visible while contrails are not persistent or visible. The persistence of chemtrails is probably due to partial oxidation of aluminium oxides. Chemtrails will persist for several minutes independently of the weather.

See: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/9116
for hints on the use of aluminium oxide nanofibers as substrate for BHA catalysts of methane.